Skip to main content

8 Ways Windows 8 Speeds Up

Wake Up Faster

In fact, booting Windows 8 is so much faster than booting Windows 7 that resuming from hibernate is no longer significantly faster than booting. With Windows 7, hibernating and resuming takes only about three quarters of the time it takes for a full boot (spending on how many files and programs you have in memory when you hibernate and so how large a file has to be read from disk when you resume). With Windows 8, there’s much less difference; on some of our tests resuming was as fast as booting, but on average resuming is just a little faster than booting.

That’s still a lot faster than resuming from hibernation in Windows 7, at least on a multicore PC like the Core i5 notebook we used for our tests, because Windows 8 shares the work of reading the hibernation file and decompressing the content between all the cores on the system. The full hibernation file is larger than the saved services and drivers that are loaded when you boot Windows, and the extra time it takes to read and decompress the bigger file is often about the same time it takes to load Windows from scratch.

Check which components might be slowing your PC down. The Windows Experience Index rates the performance of key hardware components in your PC like as the CPU, disk drive, and graphics card. This changes in Windows 8 to take account of both improvements in Windows 8 and new and faster hardware; the maximum score is 9.9 (the maximum was 5.9 when WEI was introduced in Windows Vista and increased to 7.9 with Windows 7).

  • gerchokas
    Still rockin Vista SP2 - gaming hard, no problems at all :)
    I do like all those optimizations thay're making, but Metro seems like a toy UI..
    Reply
  • nukemaster
    On page 5 you have a slight mistake.

    According to Microsoft, file copying in Windows 8 isn’t specifically faster than in Windows 8
    Reply
  • nukemaster
    And...

    I am a little disappointed in MS not fully supporting Vista(IE 10, not that I use it, but many users DO). It was not even that bad, and it is just like then fully admitting the messed it up. Either way, I still have a system with Vista and would in no way swap it to what is effectively a service pack upgrade to 7(unless the price was right) just like I did not jump out and upgrade my XP systems to Vista.
    Reply
  • hellwig
    Even with the time it takes to launch the desktop from a Metro tile, your PC is ready to do something faster.

    LOL, making excuses for Metro on the very first page? Doesn't sound promising for Windows 8. I recall similar excuse making for Vista.

    nukemasterAnd...I am a little disappointed in MS not fully supporting Vista(IE 10, not that I use it, but many users DO). It was not even that bad, and it is just like then fully admitting the messed it up. Either way, I still have a system with Vista and would in no way swap it to what is effectively a service pack upgrade to 7(unless the price was right) just like I did not jump out and upgrade my XP systems to Vista.
    Um... if you didn't upgrade from XP to Vista right away, why did you upgrade to Vista at all? All the negative press just made you want to try it out? Shoulda waited till 7.
    Reply
  • Wamphryi
    I installed Win 8 CP on my main Rig. I stuck with it for over a week and I have gotten used to finding my way around it. In many respects I liked the OS but yesterday I could no longer help but notice my Rig was suffering a decrease in performance. Boot up times were less than impressive and applications were taking longer and longer to load at start up. I believe this may be due to the fact I am running a SSD on this Rig. Now I have gone back to Win 7 Pro everything is fast and responsive again. It is the CP after all but even so.
    Reply
  • gerchokas
    asnorton44If your still on Vista you need to come back from the stone age.julianbautista87If you have vista and you like it you deserve a donkey as your way of transport instead of a car.
    Have you ever used Vista before? Its actually quite a good OS, and mostly identical to Seven btw. It does take a little longer to boot and consumes slightly more RAM, but i can spare a few secs - and hell, RAMs not an issue nowadays. Besides that I see no performance difference.
    Vista was crappy when initially released (no SPs) and installed in laptops/old pcs. Now, in fact, i see no good reason to upgrade. No plans to buy a dx11 card either
    Reply
  • SteelCity1981
    This is all well and good but none of these improvements will mean a damn thing if the avg consumor doesn't take to the radical changes with the Metro UI and the missing start menu button. This is where MS is going to make a huge mistake with Windows 8. No option to disable or get rid of Metro UI and no option to enable the start menu. if they did that Windows 8 would be a nice upgrade, but as of now it's like looking at a woman from behind and going wow she is pretty until she turns around and your're like um..nevermind.
    Reply
  • killerclick
    I'll take a slight performance hit if I don't have to look at metro, ever.

    We just need to hold out until Microsoft fails in the tablet and smartphone markets, when they'll kick Ballmer to the curb and release a service pack that allows users to disable Metro completely.
    Reply
  • jeoware
    I am using xp, so need to update to Visat
    Reply
  • stephenkendrick
    SteelCity1981This is all well and good but none of these improvements will mean a damn thing if the avg consumor doesn't take to the radical changes with the Metro UI and the missing start menu button. This is where MS is going to make a huge mistake with Windows 8. No option to disable or get rid of Metro UI and no option to enable the start menu. if they did that Windows 8 would be a nice upgrade, but as of now it's like looking at a woman from behind and going wow she is pretty until she turns around and your're like um..nevermind.
    Totally agree... perhaps not with that last bit...
    Reply